全部 标题 作者
关键词 摘要

OALib Journal期刊
ISSN: 2333-9721
费用:99美元

查看量下载量

相关文章

更多...

Access Measures Do Not Reflect Actual Access in Urology Clinics

DOI: 10.4236/oju.2017.71001, PP. 1-8

Keywords: Pediatric Urology, General Urology

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib

Abstract:

Introduction: Improvement in new patient access to urologic care is important and is increasingly measured as a reflection of practice quality. Two broad categories affect patient access: provider issues and patient preferences. We chose to study the previously unreported patient choices that affect access delays between the time a urology appointment is requested and the urology appointment itself. Methods: A 3-week real time telephone survey was conducted with callers seeking a urology appointment. If the callers did not choose the first available appointment, they were questioned as to why they did not. This data was then compared to a 3-month access delay graph noting the number of new patients offered each day. Results: Adult and pediatric urologic clinics were evaluated separately. For adult clinics, 14% of patients chose not to accept the first available appointments and 5% sought urologic care elsewhere. For pediatric clinics, 44% delayed access beyond the first available appointment. Of these, 26% were asked by the physician to delay in order to time appointments with imaging studies on the same day, or were advised to wait longer because of the nature of the patient’s diagnosis. Parents’ choice delayed 18% of the appointments beyond the first available appointment. Discussion: These data reveal that about 85% of new patient access falls within the provider’s control. The other 15% of delays rest on the preferences of the patients. These decisions significantly skew the access delay data that is increasingly being used to measure the quality of a urology practice.

References

[1]  Snow, B.W., Cartwright, P.C., Everitt, S., Ekins, M., Maudsley, W. and Aloi, S. (2009) A Method to Improve Patient Access in Urological Practice. The Journal of Urology, 182, 663-667.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2009.04.003
[2]  Jones, W., Elwyn, G., Edwards, P., Edwards, A., Emmerson, M. and Hibbs, R. (2003) Measuring Access to Primary Care Appointments: A Review of Methods. BMC Family Practice, 4, 8.
https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2296-4-8
[3]  Pickin, M., O’Cathain, A., Sampson, F.C. and Dixon, S. (2004) Evaluation of Advanced Access in the National Primary Care Collaborative. British Journal of General Practice, 54, 334-340.
[4]  Smoller, M. (1992) Telephone Calls and Appointment Requests. Predictability in an Unpredictable World. HMO Practice, 6, 25-29.
[5]  Murray, M. and Tantau, C. (2000) Same-Day Appointments: Exploding the Access Paradigm. Family Practice Management, 7, 45-50.
[6]  Blumenfeld, A. and Tischio, M. (2003) Center of Excellence for Headache Care: Group Model at Kaiser Permanente. Headache, 43, 431-440.
https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1526-4610.2003.03087.x
[7]  Bauer, M.S., McBride, L., Shea, N., Gavin, C., Holden, F. and Kenall, S. (1997) Impact of an Easy-Access VA Clinic-Based Program for Patients with Bipolar Disorder. Psychiatric Services, 48, 491-496.
https://doi.org/10.1176/ps.48.4.491
[8]  Aiello, K. (2005) Open Access Appointing in Army Primary Care Clinics. Military Medicine, 170, 370-374.
https://doi.org/10.7205/MILMED.170.5.370
[9]  Joyce, G.F., Kapur, K., Van Vorst, K.A. and Escarce, J.J. (2000) Visits to Primary Care Physicians and to Specialists under Gatekeeper and Point-of-Service Arrangements. The American Journal of Managed Care, 6, 1189-1196.
[10]  Murray, M. and Berwick, D.M. (2003) Advanced Access: Reducing Waiting and Delays in Primary Care. JAMA, 289, 1035-1040.
https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.289.8.1035
[11]  UHC Ambulatory Care Quality and Accountability Study, Web Conference, February 3, 2015.

Full-Text

Contact Us

service@oalib.com

QQ:3279437679

WhatsApp +8615387084133